City officials across Oregon are calling for expanded authority to address homeless encampments, arguing that current state laws hinder their ability to manage public spaces effectively. As the state continues to face a persistent housing crisis, the debate over how to address unsheltered homelessness is intensifying.
The League of Oregon Cities, representing municipal governments statewide, has announced that one of its top legislative priorities for 2025 will be revising a 2021 state law that restricts how cities enforce camping policies. The law, originally championed by Governor Tina Kotek during her time as a state legislator, requires that local regulations on camping be “objectively reasonable,” a standard that city leaders argue is too restrictive.
Under the current law, cities are limited in their ability to clear encampments unless adequate shelter options are available. Advocates say this approach protects the rights of unsheltered individuals and ensures that homeless sweeps do not violate constitutional protections. However, city officials contend that the law complicates their efforts to address what they see as unsafe or unsanitary conditions in public spaces.
“This isn’t about being punitive; it’s about balancing the needs of everyone in the community,” said a representative from the League of Oregon Cities. “We need more flexibility to manage encampments that pose public health or safety concerns while still working toward long-term solutions to homelessness.”
Advocates for the homeless, however, view the push to revise the law as a diversion from addressing the root causes of homelessness. They argue that the focus should be on expanding affordable housing, increasing shelter capacity, and providing mental health and addiction services, rather than prioritizing the removal of encampments.
“This is a distraction from real solutions,” said a spokesperson for a leading homeless advocacy organization. “Sweeping camps might move the problem out of sight, but it doesn’t solve the underlying issues. People experiencing homelessness need homes, not displacement.”
The debate over encampments has become increasingly contentious as homelessness becomes more visible in urban and rural areas alike. In some cities, residents and business owners have voiced concerns about the impact of encampments on public safety and local economies. City officials say their ability to respond is hamstrung by the current legal framework.
Homelessness experts warn that simply giving cities more authority to remove camps could lead to unintended consequences. Displacement without adequate alternatives often pushes unhoused individuals into more precarious situations and can disrupt access to services. Critics of camp sweeps also point out that such measures can be costly, requiring significant resources for enforcement and cleanup.
The League of Oregon Cities has not yet detailed its proposed changes to the law, but the group’s announcement signals a growing frustration among local governments. As the legislative session approaches, the issue is expected to spark a broader debate about how to balance individual rights, community concerns, and the urgent need for housing solutions.
For now, the conflict reflects a deeper divide in Oregon’s approach to tackling homelessness. While cities push for more immediate tools to address visible encampments, advocates emphasize the need for systemic changes to reduce homelessness altogether.